Evidence for God from Science

PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2019 4:56 am

Kenny wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:07 pm

PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:59 am

Kenny wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:31 am

PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 9:12 am

So, intelligence is an immaterial thing that describes a material thing, yes?

I wouldn't go as far as calling intelligence a thing. The term "thing" is a bit of a loaded term because it usually implies something that has an actual existence; something intelligence does not have.

So, intelligence doesn't have an existence?

Not by itself; no.

What is it "tied" to?

Humans.

Ken: The only reason I would believe an intelligence was involved in your scenario is because I am familiar with things made by humans vs that which is natural on Earth.

So, you came upon this weird functioning machine on a planet that has never been visited except by you, that clearly has designed parts and functionality that could not have created itself. And you assess this based upon what you know from earth AND logic - as it you also know no such machine, even one so simple could create, design, assemble, and begin self-functioning. AND you also know that every machine you've ever seen or heard of was designed and created by intelligent humans. So, why in the world would you ever believe the early moments of the universe, functioning with moving parts many magnitudes of complexity beyond what the most sophisticated machine humans have ever been able to create, and that they scarcely can understand how it works, could occur without an intelligence involved>???!!! Because that is tossing all logic and knowledge of what is possible / or has ever occurred aside. And if you question something as vast and unfathomably complex as the early (even in just the first 20 minutes) universe's mechanisms and functionalities, why wouldn't you otherwise conclude that this strange machine found functioning on a planet never visited by any human likewise could have just occurred without any intelligence involved? Because otherwise, your thinking and analysis isn't consistent or logical!

Philip wrote: [...] the early moments of the universe, functioning with moving parts many magnitudes of complexity beyond what the most sophisticated machine humans have ever been able to create [...]

The pre-inflation universe was the opposite of "complexity", viz., homogeneous, isotropic, and at an unimaginable temperature even higher than the inside of a Houston laundromat in July at mid-day.

Only until inflation and after did the perfect symmetry break to allow "complex" things like quarks and elections (and their corresponding forces) to become distinct things. Although the entropy of the universe as a whole continued to increase, local complexity increased:
protons and neutrons (from quarks), then
hydrogen atoms (from protons and electrons), then
stars (from collapsing hydrogen gas), then
the periodic table (from burning/exploding stars and colliding neutron stars), then
molecules (from chemistry), then
amino acids and polypeptides (more chemistry), then
RNA, then
life, then
Michael Jackson (from only God knows what).

Oh, yeah, an event of phenomenally precise expansion that went from nothing to the first particles to nucleosynthesis, all in just 20 minutes - yeah, that's not complex and could easily happen all by itself! Anyone that deems that simple or could happen without an intelligence controlling and orchestrating it is a person trying very hard to avoid belief in God! It's also a person with immense faith in what they believe non-intelligent things are capable of.

Ken: The only reason I would believe an intelligence was involved in your scenario is because I am familiar with things made by humans vs that which is natural on Earth.

Philip wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2019 6:47 am So, you came upon this weird functioning machine on a planet that has never been visited except by you

If I saw a washing machine under these conditions; I would doubt whatever information told me that I was the first to visit the planet.

Philip wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2019 6:47 am that clearly has designed parts and functionality that could not have created itself. And you assess this based upon what you know from earth AND logic - as it you also know no such machine, even one so simple could create, design, assemble, and begin self-functioning.

True.

Philip wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2019 6:47 am AND you also know that every machine you've ever seen or heard of was designed and created by intelligent humans. So, why in the world would you ever believe the early moments of the universe, functioning with moving parts many magnitudes of complexity beyond what the most sophisticated machine humans have ever been able to create, and that they scarcely can understand how it works, could occur without an intelligence involved>???!!!

I also assess from earth AND logic that nature precedes intelligent beings; so why would I assume an intelligent being preceded the Big Bang?

Ken: I also assess from earth AND logic that nature precedes intelligent beings

No you don't! What intelligent being have you ever seen come from anything but another intelligent being or creature??? ZERO - that's what! And no one else has either! Now, the fact that you BELIEVE non-intelligence can produce intelligence shows me you don't know the limitations of all non-intelligent things. Non-intelligent things have NO attribute, ability, awareness, self-produced mobility, or capacity whatsoever to seek or acquire intelligence! Nor has any non-intelligent, non-living thing EVER shown such ability.

But your first hurdle, for intelligence, would be that just the right things, with just the right attributes, just happened to appear, and in the right amounts and sequences - which the odds are all astronomically / mathematically against. Then the right supportive conditions have to be in place - which requires another huge list of unbelievably complex things - and not just on earth - but across the universe and galaxies! And then the conditions that allow life to exist must be in place (again, not just on earth) - add a huge exponential multiplier to those already mathematical impossibilities. And THEN, these systems must be orchestrated and interactive. Add a whole bunch more zeros. And THEN, SOMEHOW, inexplicably, miraculously, a first cell has to come to life. All of this, brilliantly, by itself, without intelligence, without guidance. Believing such is possible is pure belief in magic - miracle upon miracle and on a scale we can scarcely fathom. Believing this is absolute faith in magic!

Ken, you ARE a man of great faith!

Philip wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2019 3:29 pm

Ken: I also assess from earth AND logic that nature precedes intelligent beings

No you don't! What intelligent being have you ever seen come from anything but another intelligent being or creature??? ZERO -

That's not what I said. I said Nature (the environment intelligent beings live in) PRECEDES (meaning existed before) intelligent beings.

Philip wrote: Oh, yeah, an event of phenomenally precise expansion that went from nothing to the first particles to nucleosynthesis, all in just 20 minutes [...]

Yes - after the 1st nanosecond, developing according to a few simple equations. You've yet to acknowledge that, or give a specific counterexample.

Philip wrote: [...] yeah, that's not complex and could easily happen all by itself!

Simply sarcasm is not an argument.

No one is claiming that that 1st nanosecond is simple. We don't know yet. But what we know after that 1st nanosecond is a testament to the human mind finding clockwork simplicity.

You can make your same complexity argument for a picture of a Mandelbrot set, until I show you the corresponding underlying trivial iterative function:
f_c(z) = z^2 + c
Staggering complexity from simplicity.

Weather patterns are also incredibly complex, but simple equations model the behavior. The problem is that sensors and partial differential equations have to model thousands of cubic kilometers of atmosphere to be reasonably accurate. But does anyone claim that a weather pattern cannot "happen all by itself"? Of course not. We're hundreds of years past when we needed Zeus to throw the lightning bolts.

Kenny wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2019 5:46 am

PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2019 4:56 am

Kenny wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:07 pm

PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:59 am

Kenny wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:31 am
I wouldn't go as far as calling intelligence a thing. The term "thing" is a bit of a loaded term because it usually implies something that has an actual existence; something intelligence does not have.

So, intelligence doesn't have an existence?

Not by itself; no.

What is it "tied" to?

Humans.

Since we have moved this over to the other thread, I will leave this here, ok?

Philip: [...] yeah, that's not complex and could easily happen all by itself!

Morny: Simply sarcasm is not an argument.

Sometimes - as I'm sure our resident expert would agree - sarcasm is appropriate!